Wednesday, March 14.
Debate on the Lords Amendments resumed.
Mr Powle.] He is for expedition in this matter, for
fear lest whilst we are consulting the securing of
Flanders, it may be lost. The Lords Amendments
speak not positively of the word "Sicily," but he is
convinced, by the Debate, that it seems the better way
to leave "Sicily" out of the Address, not being of equal consequence to England as Flanders is, and therefore not so convenient to stand in the same paragraph,
left they think we value them alike—He would lay
the whole weight of the Address upon "Flanders."
He thinks "Sicily" included sufficiently in other words
of the Address—And it goes farther than to both "Sicily and Flanders." 'Tis always the security of foreign
powers abroad, to make War with France upon equal
terms, and for us to give grains to preponderate.
Visibly, there is no land power to oppose France,
but the House of Austria. France makes encroachments
all round on his neighbours, Lorrain, Flanders, Burgundy, &c. If Germany be not left in a condition to fight
France, you will not obtain your end. France borders
upon us, on the west part of England—Whether we
name "Sicily," or no, is not much material—Spain will
never enter into Alliance, unless Sicily be part of the
terms with them. But he would make a distinction, that
whenever the French touch Flanders, England is in a
flame—He would have all the world know, that it is
better to leave "Sicily" out of the Address, and to
show the Lords by reasons, that it is not of equal moment with "Flanders."
The Amendment of "Sicily" was, by Vote, rejected.
Mr Secretary Williamson.] The difficulty is great,
whether of taking in "Sicily," or not, on both sides of
the Question. He has found that they of Flanders
are so apt to lay the whole burden upon us, that it
will load our negotiations—He was forming arguments
out of the same topics that Powle's were, but he would
let the Vote go.
Sir Philip Warwick.] The Lords proposition does
not induce you to give Money. He would agree to
the words "utmost assistance," as they are, from the
Mr Sacheverell.] Would have the thing, first weighed, the manner of its coming from the Lords, and
the consequence, before you make the proposition,
least you be tied up to the single Question we desire
not to come to—Such a thing was never offered the
House of Commons before. The Lords must either
agree to our Address, or add; and none of this is
done. They have agreed to the Address in the words
of their Answer; and then they only express their
fears, and would have "the humble advice backed
with some assurances, &c." This they propose not by
way of Amendment. Then consider what the Lords
offer—But then 'tis left indefinitely—" Any Alliances"—And those proposed, &c. to be, in consequence,
supported with lives and fortunes. He is amazed that
the Lords should question that, when the House of
Commons "advise" his Majesty, they should fail to
"assist" him how to do it. They have always "assisted" in cases they like not, much more in this that
they address for. He will make no hasty Motion;
but his thoughts are, that, in this Conference, you
should show the Lords that it is not regular, nor parliamentary; and when that is done, likewise to let the
Lords know "that no Parliament ever failed of "assisting" those methods they advised, when taken"—He
will not add any thing here, but show that 'tis irregular, and unparliamentary—And if the Alliances
you have proposed force the King to a War, whenever
his Majesty acquainted us that those Alliances have
induced a War, the House never failed to assist him.
Mr Hampden.] By the rules of Parliament, you cannot take notice of this—There is nothing to graft this
upon; and the Lords may still put in something new.
It is against the common way of transacting between the
two Houses; and is a point to be handled tenderly, and
the Lords handle it so. 'Tis nice, and handled as
such. The Lords are tender of their "Judicature,"
well, now nourished up, and grown to some stature—
And we are tender of "Money." If you meddle with
this part of the Lords Answer, or take notice of it,
you then explain it, viz. That the Lords have begun
with Money, and take it so for lives and fortunes.
The Lord Chief Justice Vaughan, when he sat here,
(a man of great learning and reason) was against such
a Vote—You proffer it, and are to do it, but it is unparliamentary to make such promises. You never
have failed the King, and need not promise—He desires the Conference may be for leaving out "Sicily,"
and then, according to the rules of Parliament, no
Answer is to be given to the other; and he thinks by it
you have only pursued the ends you aimed at.
The Speaker.] He takes this to be the case. You
send an Address, and with it a Message to the Lords.
In the Address to the King, the Lords are to join,
and they amend part of the Address. To the regular
matter of the Address they concur, but as to the making it to the King, with the reasons, in that they
Sir Thomas Meres.] All Conferences are of two parts,
something written, and discourse. To the Address
written, agree or not—This or that addition, alteration, or Amendment, is in the line, or words—To that
written down you give a written answer. That you have
done. Now for the matter of discourse only. If the
Lords intend to have an Answer, neither House tye
themselves punctually to every thing—They touch
what they can well answer. 'Tis said, "the Lords
did it so tenderly and modestly, that they used but some
intimation:"—He would have you do so too, with all
the fairness that may be. It looks as if the Lords
started at the word, when they mentioned it, and thought
of the King's Speech; and he would have our Answer with all candour imaginable. You have gone as
far as you can by your Vote. He is for no discourses.
Would have reasons drawn by a Committee for not agreeing to the former part of the Lords Answer, but
not put in writing. But for "Sicily," would have
those reasons in writing—And would have every man's
help in it.
Mr Swynfin.] The Question is now, what we shall
farther do with this Address, sent up to the Lords, and
their Message. The Lords answer, "That they concur to
the Address," and he thinks we may concur with that
variation you have made of "Sicily"—And only now
draw up reasons as to "Sicily," without saying any
thing unnecessary, to make dispute whether the rest
of their Message be parliamentary, or not. We desire to concur in the Address and matter. They say,
we do the same thing desired, as it is in the Paper.
He sees no distinction in the thing, and we need take
notice of no more. Only there remains to appoint a
Committee to draw up reasons why we agree not as to
Mr Vaughan.] The safety of the King and Kingdom
is, that the Lords should concur with us in the matter
and end of the Address. There are two principles in
it, to secure our own Nation, and secure the Netherlands, and the manner is for stricter Alliances. But the
Lords apprehend that the end is not brought about, because we do not encourage the King, &c. But we
have done these methods. We have propounded Alliances, as proper to bring those ends about. The
Lords say "because not backed with encouraging the
King, &c. nor assurances, &c." Consider what kind of
proposition this is; can we give the King greater security than what we lie under already? We cannot
give greater divinely, civilly, or naturally; not only
meat to satisfy the present hunger, but to secure from
starving for the future. These itimations from the
Lords are not regular, without Amendments of our
Address, and possibly hereafter the Lords may do so
in Bills. Therefore he is for reasons why we disagree
to that part of the Lords Conference.
Col. Birch.] When we are once got out of the way, he
sees what straits we are put to, and the farther the more
we go out. He is of opinion, from one end to the other, that the Lords do not proceed in the ordinary
way of transactions; not one step. Before ever the
Lords enter into the matter, they tell us of "continuation of good correspondence," without doubt, for
some great reasons. This is giving no Answer to our
Message, and perhaps he can show you they could not.
They tell you why it will not effect the end and the
matter, intimating that something might be more effectual. Farther, they offer to your considerations
whether "Sicily" should be added; this is not the
ordinary way. From whence he collects, that the matter they like well, but they offered you the rest in as
soft words as possibly theycould. Be it supposed, that we
had said, "we will support the King in it with our
lives and fortunes," before we sent it up—'Tis not the
ordinary way of Parliament. If you had ever so much
mind to make an addition to what is before you, you
could not. It is as fully in your Address already, as
if expressed. He offers this—Let the Lords know by
a Message, "that their Answer is not in the usual way
of Parliament." If you give reasons for it, you admit the thing; and the consequence is, either "agree,"
or "disagree." There is no third thing that can arise
out of it. If they agree with us, he hopes the King
will be advised by us both. If the Lords disagree,
we go by ourselves. He cannot foresee the consequence of such hintings from the Lords, which may
hint us out of all methods of Parliament.
Mr Waller.] He is not much in love with the Lords
expression. But if it is an original Motion as to "Money," he likes it much worse. When the King came
first in, there was a treaty with Portugal about the
marriage with our [present] Queen. The Castilians
threw papers about in Hyde Park, with reflections, to
prevent it. The King asked the Lords advice about
it, and, by a Conference, the Lords sent for us; and
"there was a standing by the King in it," by the Lords,
and here was great haste amongst us to concur with the
Lords. But he told you then "he liked it not, that
things like Money should come from the Lords."
But he feared calling to the Bar for it. The House
was disgusted, and he was not seconded in it. Consider that it is better to go in the light than in the dark.
We ask the Lords concurrence with us, to stop the current of a great Prince—If there be union betwixt the
Lords and us, all will go well—When the King shall
ask the Lords, "This is your Address, and the Commons bring another." In this Address the Lords make
many doubts—The Lords take it not ill that we bring
them doubts; they take it well. We are a great nation, if safe at home—And we may be so abroad, unless the Lords and we fall a quarrelling, as we have
done these two or three times; look big at one another, and so part. 'Tis not long ago that we joined
with the French against the Dutch, and we gave advice no longer to go along with the French; in Holland their land was drowned, and their cities taken,
and one Vote of ours drained their lands, and restored
their cities. What is the King without you? Nothing. Nor you without him. Therefore in defending
our neighbours, let us not fall out with the Lords—
Avoid all quarrels, for our strength is union with the
Lords, as Sampson's was in his hair. He moves, therefore, to agree, &c.
Sir William Coventry.] Though there are some mistakes in the method of the Lords, yet what they have
said is a concurrence with you. They tell you, "they
apprehend it may not altogether answer the end, &c."
But they do concur so far as to answer that end. So that
the whole is agreed, except "Sicily"—And they may
reply to that; but not in the other matter. Neither
tan the Lords nor we add any thing farther to that.
The course of Parliament is this; we leave out "Sicily," and we give the Lords reasons for it. He thinks
there is some mistake in the Lords Amendments, which
are in totidem verbis in writing—But that which the
Conferrers have put into your hands, ought to be in
two Papers. He looks upon one part of the Paper as
discourse, and it would be but an ordinary civility to
take notice of it only by way of discourse, by a total
silence in your reasons, but would not have it flat—
That you would take notice of it. And would so coneive it sufficient, for that you hope neither the Lords
or the King will doubt that this is in your care, and
either the Lords nor we decline such assistances as the
Sir Thomas Meres.] The Lord Treasurer read the
Paper to us at the Conference, and he wrote till he came
to the Amendments of "words in lines;" and then
he believed he should have had the Paper given the
Managers. Sir William Coventry demanded the Paper.
The Treasurer seemed to be at a stand, whether to deliver it, or not. "Nay," said. Meres, "we must have
the Paper by usual Order, because it mentions Amendments by lines;" and so the Treasurer gave it them.
Sir Job Charlton.] The Lord Treasurer Southamp/ton, at a Conference, once, gave the Managers the Paper, to help their memories, to prevent mistakes.
But it is no more than the courtesy of the Lords.
But the other Paper of Amendments of our Message
he gave by itself, The first Paper was not entered
into our Journal, but the other of the Amendments
was; and it passed over in the House without any Debate.
Mr Secretary Williamson.] The matter from the
Lords seems natural, as for a person to foresee that his
suit should not miscarry—And there is no way for you
not to be defeated in your suit, without answering
what is necessary to it. That being so, what kind of
Answer would you make the Lords, to give this Address
recommendation to the King? The Lords have industriously used terms of greater civility than ordinary,
and he would have you take this in the most favourable sense that may be; and, he believes, the Address
is so much in their minds, that he agrees with the
temperament the Lords have offered, and would therefore take good time before you give them your mind,
and that as to "Sicily" in Paper. And for this, to say
nothing of it.
The Speaker.] When you declared the Canary Patent illegal, you desired the Lords concurrence at a
Conference. The Lords knew not your reason why,
and could not concur, and so you sent reasons; but
they were not entered into the Journal, because they
were not delivered to the Lords in writing. So nothing is entered into the Journal, but what are immediate transactions of the two Houses; and these reasons were not delivered in writing.
Sir Thomas Lee.] The ancient way was not to deliver the Paper at a Conference: But the Lord that
managed said, "I will lend you the Paper, but you
must restore it me again."
Sir Robert Howard.] Always when Amendments of
lines are expressed in a Paper, it is delivered to the
Serjeant Maynard.] If it be declared, that the King
will make War with your advice, it is your duty to support him in it—If not, we have voted so much as may
induce War, and so may be obliged to maintain it. In
King James's time, Serjeant Glanville managed a Conference, much of the same nature with this. He is of this
persuasion, that this from the Lords is an invitation
to you to raise Money. Though now spoken softly,
yet hereafter they may be plainer. Therefore, as this
case stands, he would have a full agreement to the
Message, and not be peevish in the manner, when
we agree in the matter—You entertain such a proposition; therefore would have nothing said as to the manner. 'Tis unnecessary to do any thing—It may be
of ill consequence at Conferences—Whatever is there
is from the House—The Lords bring but their ears to
the Conference—But as to what they enter, your
book is not Record, theirs is;—and whatever is done,
he would maintain a good correspondence.
A Committee was appointed to draw up Reasons to be offered
at a Conference, upon the Debate.
Thursday, March 15.
Counsel was heard at the Bar for Mr Onslow, as Guardian to
the Duke of Norfolk.
Sir John King, the Duke of York's Sollicitor.] The Writ De
lunatico inspiciendo was taken out in 1654, and the Duke of Norfolk was thereupon found lunatic, and then committed to the
custody of the Earl of Northumberland, the present Marquess of
(fn. 1) , and Sir Richard Onslow, and since to the Marquess
of Worcester and Mr Onslow. Mr Onslow was no way concerned in levying these fines. They were levied in 1654, before Mr Onslow had the custody of the Duke, and those fines
were levied in pursuance of settlements made by Thomas Earl of
Arundel, [the Duke's grandfather] not for above 150l. per ann.
and then the Duke had intervals. 'Tis objected, "that Mr
Onslow suffered the Duke to be abroad." He answers, that, all
along, the resolution was to bring the Duke over; but they were
satisfied abundantly that he could not be brought over without
running the greatest hazard imaginable of his life. In 1652, the
then power [Cromwell] had a design to bring him over. The
Lady Arundel, his mother, and the Duke of Richmond, sent Mr
Burberry with commission to bringhim over; but found, upon consultation of Padua physicians, (who gave it upon oath, and under
their hands,) that it was not possible, without hazard of his life, to
bring him over. In 1654, there was another design of the
Committees then in being to have him over; but, even at that
time, there were no hopes of bringing him but bound hand and
foot, and with great hazard of his life. In 1656, there was a
great plague in Italy, and then the intention was to remove him
to Vincenza, which is but eighteen miles from Padua; and for
three or four days he was so averse to remove, that he would neither eat nor drink but what they forced down him. So the physicians advised him to be let alone. In 1660, and 1661, there
was a design to bring him over—All the rest of the family were
satisfied with his being at Padua, except the three branches of it
who petition. They have let him alone all this while. It has
been lately certified (in February last) that he has a continual
frenzy, and that there is no bringing him over but bound hand
and foot. The Duke's estate is 1200 l. per ann. and very little
over; which Mr Onslow has constantly remitted to him, and he
has expended it. He has the best house in Padua, with twenty servants, who, out of compassion, bind him, for fear of beating out his own brains, till he is in some measure returned again
to himself. Mr Onslow has behaved himself in his guardianship
as a fair and worthy Committee of the Duke's person as a lunatic.
Mr Pepys.] Col. Birch said, "He would have the
Duke brought back, because he was an Englishman, a
Protestant, and a Peer of the Realm." He would ask
this only Question, Whether a man in such a condition
as the Duke is in, who raves "That he is of the Devil's
religion," and other words more blasphemous, is not
much of a madman? What should he do here? As
a Peer, he knows no use of his Counsel, or any reason
why he should come over. Therefore he would not
agree with the Committee.
Mr Finch.] He is against agreeing with the Committee, their matter being complex, of divers things.
The interest of the family is perfectly waved by the adverse party. They never proved the lady's interest in
the life of this Duke. But another brother offered his
hundred pound more than she can pretend to by
the Duke's life, more like a father than a brother.
One doctor, at the Committee, said, "That it was a
fatuity, and that the older he grew the less it would
be."—But the more inveterate, the more easily cured,
none say—They spoke of remote knowledge, of eight
years ago, not to be valued, but now you have a certificate taken upon oath—"Jurando attestamur." They
certify now what they did not eight years ago; and
he would not agree with the Committee.
[Resolved, That this House doth agree with the Committee,
That an humble Address be made to his Majesty, that the
Duke of Norfolk may be brought home into England from his
Confinement beyond sea.]
Mr. Powle reports the reasons, to be offered at a Conference,
for not agreeing with the Lords, &c. as follow:
"The Commons conceive that the nature of the Address
sent up to your Lordships is such, (being for the preservation of
his Majesty and his people,) that it can leave no room for his Majesty to doubt of such assistance as the safety of the Kingdom
"Reasons for the Commons not agreeing with the Lords in
their Amendment of adding the words, "and in Sicily."
"First, The Address, mentioning the danger from the growth
and power of the French King, the Commons conceive, doth,
in those general words, comprehend not only Sicily, but any other part (though not particularly named) where his Majesty's
prudence shall think fit that dangerous growth should be restrained."
"Secondly, The special mention of Sicily would seem to put less
weight upon the preservation of the Spanish Netherlands, the conservation of which the Commons conceive to be of much more
moment to his Majesty's Kingdoms than that of Sicily; for, though
it may be of great importance to our trade, that Sicily be not in the
hands of the French King, yet the safety of his Majesty's Kingdoms is not so immediately endangered thereby, and therefore
ought not to be equally insisted upon."
The Lords agreed to the Commons reasons, and the Address
was thereupon presented to the King by both Houses in the Banquetting-House.
Friday, March 16.
Debate on the recalling the English forces out of the French
Mr Hale.] They cannot be little ones about the
King that suffer these things. How can we think of
securing Flanders, whilst we are false to ourselves? He
moves, therefore, "that such as have been aiding, assisting, or abetting, to men going over to the French
service out of Ireland, (and some have been compelled
out of Scotland) may be declared enemies to the King
Sir John Knight.] Gives an account of a ship loaden with 500 men in Ireland, who landed at Brest in
France. There have been no less shipped out of Ireland for France than 10 or 12,000 men; and this he will
Lord Fitzbarding.] The Lord Lieutenant has stopped some, and taken all the care imaginable to prevent others going into France. He has done all he
can by Proclamation, and by stopping such as have attempted to go over.
Sir George Downing.] If any, by order, trick, or
connivance, have suffered these men to go over, he
would have them declared enemies to their King and
Country. The growing greatness of France is of more
concern to us than all other considerations whatever. In the very port of London this thing cannot be
hindered. Certain vessels have made it a constant trade
of carrying men over to Dunkirk, and all that can be
done by Law is done already. No power in Law can
help it, and they will swear us out of it. There is no
want of will in the Commissioners of the Customs, and
yet they cannot prevent it.
Mr Garroway.] You are told by Downing, "that the
Commissioners of the Customs cannot remedy mens
going into France;" and therefore he would have you
do it. Vessel after vessel goes over, and Mr Boreman's
yatch, in particular, carries men over, and seven others. A Vote of yours may recall all these men.
Such a mark of your displeasure may do it, and he
hopes you may have such advantage by it, that all may
Sir John Ernly.] 'Tis said, "that from Ireland they
send men into France;" and so they do into Flanders and
Holland also; but the thing you are upon, is, the countenance of sending more to the French than the other
way. There has been a Proclamation against it, and
all the care taken that can be, and he wishes a Law
were made to prevent it. But it occurs not to him
how to prevent it, and he believes as many go over on
one side as the other. He believes that the King countenances nothing of this, nor any public authority, but
officers bred up that way will fill up their companies,
and steal your men, and your money too, if they can.
Col. Sandys.] Hears it said, "No care can be taken
more than is already."—That is a strange thing! If
they forfeit their vessels, and are punished besides when
they come home, that would remedy it.
Sir William Coventry.] He thinks this can be no long
Debate, because there is nothing against it, and he
hopes we shall have fruit of it. It would be an unfortunate Motion, if this should not take, and it would
be thought abroad as if there was a propensity to
France of some great men about us, which makes
men dare not to execute the Proclamation. 'Tis so plain,
that the world have seen it; and no fruit of it but the suspicions and ill will of our neighbours. Now a little
encouragement, by a Vote, he hopes may prevent it.
We are obliged to support it, and he would have a brand
upon such as have suffered men to go over, since the
Mr Secretary Williamson.] Your Vote proposed is,
"That they are Enemies to King and Country, &c." He
esteems them so. But he knows not how a Vote of
this House may operate; a Vote, a parte ante, of punishment to hang over their heads. This is meant to
encourage men that execute the Proclamation, and in
his place they never wanted encouragement; and he
has been as forward to lay hands on the party offending. He submits it to you, what mortification this
Vote would be upon those that serve the King, implying
a neglect. At Yarmouth, within this fortnight, a Captain formed his company, and was stopped at Ipswich,
going for Holland—It is likely that things will have
these fates, and their goings over are done promiscuously.
Sir Samuel Barnardiston.] He will give you information of what he knows. One that came forth from
Calais saw 700 men land there to recruit regiments in
Sir Charles Wheeler.] He has two sons in the Prince of
Orange's service, and he would have no sort of justice come
up to an after-game. He would know who they are
that have suffered these men to go over; else you will
put a great discouragement on those who have hindered it. Lay the load as heavy as you can, for the time
Mr Vaughan.] When a Vote of this House, and the
dignity of the Crown, are equally despised, it is time
to look about us. When we are assisting that greatness of the French King, to our own destruction, we
should not only have fallen undefended, but unpitied.
When a Proclamation is grounded on a Vote of this
House, not to be obeyed is a disparagement to Royal
Authority. He has always been afraid of mincing the
matter in this House. The body politic moves as the
natural. We must mind as well not being hurt, as remedy when hurt. The very talking of these things in
this House has done good, and he would have them
voted "Enemies to King and Country, &c."
Earl of Ancram.] We are going about a good work,
and he approves of it. Only he finds something of
reflection on a person, in relation to forces gone out of
Scotland into France; but let that Lord, whom it seems
to reflect upon (the Duke of Lauderdale) if he opposed it not as much as in him lay, suffer your displeasure.
Col. Birch.] Now you begin at the right end. He
is for naming the thing. We have had no luck in naming persons. He would have things find them out.
But he has heard of some things stopped going for
Holland, but of none for France. He has nothing to
say to this or that person; but when the Nation sees
you in earnest in things, you may be more successful
in persons. Two years ago a Proclamation was directly against men going into France; but if no persons
are to be found "Enemies to the King and Kingdom,"
this has spoiled all. If any Gentleman has any
thing more particular, he would hear it. In the mean
time, pass your Vote.
The Vote was stated, and passed afterwards, &c.
Resolved, That those persons who have either compelled, advised, assisted, or encouraged the raising, levying, [carrying,] or
sending any of his Majesty's subjects into the military service of
the French King, since his Majesty's Proclamation (issued upon an
Address of this House) of the 19th of May, 1675, are and shall be
esteemed Enemies to the peace and safety of the King and
Mr Dalmaboy.] The Spanish Envoy complained that
men were landed at Calais. The King therefore sent a
Letter to the Council of Scotland, not to do any thing
against the Neutrality; and the persons were punished
that did the contrary. A Proclamation was sent, and
the King has taken all care to prevent it. There are
three times the number go into Holland, than into
France. There are in Holland three Scotch regiments of
foot, and two of horse.
Sir Thomas Meres.] He observes on this Question how
some are winching—He would give the Proclamation
all the advantage you can, and thinks it would do well,
if you grounded it upon the Address made by this
House, not as an ordinary Proclamation of trade, or
Sir Thomas Lee.] The Proclamation you are moved
for, was that grounded upon your Address of aggrandizing France, to the destruction of England—A great
deal of difference from the other!
Sir Harbottle Grimstone.] According to his old manner
of speaking, he'll call a spade, a spade. The Address
was grounded upon Law, and we must either call them
friends, or enemies. Those that are not for us, are
against us. But let us do one another that right, as to
own our former Vote, and to let the thing hunt the
Mr Sec. Williamson.] He doubts that men shall be
declared criminal from the time you antedate—Should
you declare men criminal now? The Proclamation did
not reach them. He believes "contrary" the more
proper word. If "since," it must be "contrary", and if
"contrary," "since" the Proclamation—"Contrary" is
the more legal word, for it is relative to the levying of
men, and "contrary" should stand.
Mr Sacheverell.] He wonders that the officers of the
Customs, and one of the Governors in a high place (Col.
Stroude) should not know of the King's Proclamation.
It seems, gentlemen knew who these were, that ordered
the men to go into France, and he would have them,
whoever they are, be declared, and not shelter the
great men who have done this. He hopes the Vote
will find them out.
Mr Sec. Williamson.] He would shelter no man. His
doctrine is, that those that offended "contrary to" the
Proclamation should be found out.
Mr Garroway.] Put the Question whether the word
"since" shall stand in the Question, to come fairly to
Sir Richard Temple.] He has no design to protect those
whom the Laws do not protect. In the Proclamation,
whoever abets, or contrives, is a principal, and it is
not his business to fill his head with Proclamations.
Serjeant Maynard.] They that went away before the
Proclamation, went for want to live, but there was no
such necessity upon the advisers. It aggravates the fault,
and lessens not the crime.
Mr Swynfin.] You are told "there is a necessity of the
word "contrary;" else it would be no crime at all to go,
&c." But that word comes more properly in another
place, and the whole import of it is afterwards.
Mr Williams.] In this Vote, what we principally drive
at is to punish counsellors of these mens going over.
The Proclamation mentions "persons in the service of
the French King," and calls them out of it, and prohibits persons going into that service; so that the counsellors are not within the words of the Proclamation. Perhaps by construction and inference they may be, but not
directly "contrary"—He fears it will be but a cobweb
Vote. Little things will be taken in, and great ones
The words "and contrary to" were left out of the Vote.
Mr Sacheverell.] Now he offered not this of "compelling" in the Vote, in vain; for he has information,
upon Oath, that both last year, and this year, the King's
subjects have been "compelled" to go into the French
service, and were tied like slaves, and put into the common jail; and such as, in obedience to the Proclamation, would not go, had their ears cut off. There is a
Master in Chancery's hand to the information; and,
farther than that, one that would have escaped, was
tied to the main-yard of the ship, and hanged. The
officers came to Edinburgh after the Proclamation—
After they had tied these men back to back, no
officer stopped, nor seized them. Some persons would
have stopped these informations. Some great men would
have stifled these evidences—This gentleman, for no
other reason but because he knew of your Address, and
was informed of this dealing with the King's subjects
in Scotland, and thought it his duty to inform you, went
with these gentlemen to a Master in Chancery, where
they gave information of what was done in Scotland,
&c. And for this, by a Warrant from one of the King's
Secretaries (Williamson) now in his eye, his study was
rifled, and he made a close prisoner, in a Messenger's
house. He offers his Petition; if he cannot make it
out, it is nothing to him.
The Petition was read, subscribed "John Harrington
(fn. 2) ," to the
effect Sacheverell had opened. The Warrant of Commitment on
the back side of the Petition, was read, viz. "You are to take
into your custody John Harrington, for suspicious practices, &c."
Mr Sec. Williamson.] The ground of this proceeding
against Harrington was, an Oath by one Harriot, Lemmon,
and Murray, Scotchmen, at the instigation of Fonseça, (the
Spanish Ambassador's Secretary) who had engaged
Harriot, &c. to the utmost disturbance of the government, to create jealousy between the King and this
House, clandestinely seeking out informations from
Scotland. Harriot he found out, and examined him upon Oath. The purport was this: Harriot was one of
the 500 men carried into Ostend, by one of their frigates,
where he was not willing to serve, but was put in mind,
that if he would pass into England, he should have his
liberty. He got an Address to Fonseça, and this Harrington was to have the care of him, and gave him money;
but took care to ask him about men pressed in Scotland,
and other transactions there, and took notes;—which
Harrington transcribed fair, and took him to a Master
in Chancery, where he swore to that paper, though he
never read it. But he said to the Master in Chancery
"he had read it," but to him (Williamson) he deposed
otherwise. This fellow said, "he swore not conjointly
what the other deposed, but for himself only, and not
to the cutting off ears." Says Harrington, "I'll get
money for you to go thither—That will be good news to
Duke Hamilton." This practice was so indirect, and by
Harrington's carriage at the Council, he appeared to be
the most grown young man in his impudence, and, he
believes, in his loyalty—He stands committed for Contempt—He used that style, that air, and mien to the
King (fn. 3) , as "It may be so"—"I'll answer you no more"
—And the King said, "I'll ask you no more." And
for this he was committed by the Lords of the" Council's Order.
Mr Garroway.] He rises not up to justify Harrington's deportment to the King, but he has heard that the
last day the Committee of Grievances sat, these people
waited at the door to tell you what they petition now,
and, he believes, Williamson will tell you what's become
of Harriot, &c. now not to be found; taken out of
his lodgings—Would ask Williamson about the commitment being brought hither to give evidence.
Mr Secretary Williamson.] He never saw him, since
the deposition in his House. Harrington said to Harriot, "Go off; what you have said may cost you your
Sir Thomas Lee.] Williamson tells you of "Oath
made of seditious practices."—Harrington brought them
to be examined about men pressed, contrary to the
King's Proclamation. Harriot informed a Master in
Chancery of it upon Oath, and was not committed for
Contempt of the King. See now, the crime is to go
to a Master in Chancery, before the King, and he is committed to a Messenger before he was brought to the
King, and there as a criminal, and asked Questions,
and he would not inform against himself. This, it seems,
is "unmannerly" and "sedition." No wonder we have
so little account of miscarriages, when things are thus
managed in Council.
Mr Secretary Williamson.] His commitment was for
going where he ought not to go, in matters of State,
to give Information, which belongs not to a Master in
Chancery to examine. He should have come to those
whom he ought. He wants breeding indeed, the best
part of breeding, that of the mind, but for the other,
he is a well-fashioned man.
Lord Cavendish.] He is far from excusing any man
that has failed in good manners to the King; but he hears
nothing alleged against his deportment at the Lords of
the Council "but his looks, air, and mien." Nothing apparent against him, but that he is unwilling to answer
against himself. Williamson said, "he was committed
for carrying Men to depose before a Master in Chancery, in matters of State, before he came to the King's
Council;" which he might justify, the Parliament sitting; especially apprehending that some of the King's
Council are highly guilty of what we are about to
Sir Francis Winnington.] He attended the Council
when Harrington was brought. He observes, that the
weight of exception is put upon it; that he was committed that so he might be prevented coming here
to inform you. If he knows the matter of fact, it is
duty to acquaint you with it. Harrington, with another, was summoned to attend the Council, and came.
Harrington was fairly asked Questions about disturbances of the Government, and what he knew of such
a man. That no man is brought thither to accuse himself, is their rule; but to ask if he knew such a man,
and what is become of him. Any man that owes allegiance to the King, ought not to refuse answering
there. He looked not like an uneducated rustic man.
No man behaves himself with more humanity than the
King. But he never saw any gentleman more rude to
another; throwing his head about—These were only
Questions concerning other persons, asked fairly by
my Lord Chancellor (fn. 4) . And he answered, "Ask what
Questions you will, I will answer you none." Those
common Questions that he was asked, no man will deny
to another. The Privy-Council may do what a CourtLeet may, quia male se gessit. 'Tis a common thing to
commit upon rude deportment—And his commitment
was, because he was of an ill behaviour before his
Prince—The Law allows reverence to the King. He
being present when this passed, he thought it his duty
to acquaint you with it.
Mr Williams.] He stands not up to vindicate ill behaviour, but the Rights of our Liberties. He expected some particular certain cause from the great
Minister (Williamson) of this man's commitment—He
finds only suspicion of seditious practices—So general
an allowance is not to be admitted. Men are not to
be imprisoned upon notions. If he were committed
on the account of seditious practices, this is not the
manner. No man is imprisoned but by lex terræ et
judicium parium suorum; by the King's Writ, not by
verbal commandment from the King's Ministers. He
does complain, and is in great fear of arbitrary proceedings. This way of commitment has been usual,
but no Authority for it by Statute or Common Law:
But many complaints of it.—"The King's presence!"
—How far that may intrench upon the Liberty of the
Subject, ought to be examined. He doubts. It is said,
"He was judged by his eye and mien"—Every man
has not bonne mine. Persons ought not to be committed for that in that place.
Sir William Coventry.] He fears that the business before you, the more you handle it, will run the more
into your fingers. He could heartily wish the respectpart to the King declined, as it is not to be handled
without pricking your fingers. Liberty is a tender
thing, and may concern himself as well as another
man. A Secretary of State may call a man before
him, and if he refuses to answer, he may put him in
custody; and when he has him, the King may have
notice of it; but the crime of the Chancery-Affidavit,
and the disrespect to the King intervening, he is committed for that. It seems, Harrington is in custody,
and if he be of any use to you he will not be refused,
if you send for him to know what is become of Harriot;
but as to the disrespect-part, he would leave that.
Sir Henry Capel.] This is an unhappy Debate, and
he desires we may be rid of it as soon as we can—
He would preserve a good correspondence with the
King, and seconds the motion, to be tender to meddle
with this person. If a common Justice of the Peace
may commit him in this case, much more the Council Board. We are gone and lost for ever, if we pay
not respect to our Prince, and if ever to any Prince,
to this. We know the tenderness of his nature—He
would send for Harrington, and interrogate him what
you please, as to the other business.
Mr Vaughan.] No man that understands his Duty
to his Prince, but will say that Harrington's gesture deserves censure. Remember your own Stations: When
your Laws are contemned, Justice is violated, and expected to be relieved at a Committee of Grievances;
and if a person be so used that comes hither, you must
enquire into it. He would adjourn the business to tomorrow, and let the Petitioner come then to the bar
to give you an account of the grievance.
Col. Birch.] If we slubber over this day's work, we
shall never remedy it again. Such things as these
come bye ways—But this shall not fright him—But the
Warrant of Commitment must tell you what this is.
Williamson ought to have secured the person that gave
information, as well as have committed Harrington.
He would adjourn the Debate to to-morrow.
Mr Sacheverell.] He loves plain English, and hopes
other Gentlemen do so too. As this Case seems to
him, if this be allowed, there needs neither Star-chamber, nor Oath, ex officio—Not only the Council-table,
but the Lords House commit for "Contempt—"
(A very brave word!) He asks whether any Commitment can be without specifying special Matter of Crime,
and not mere Contempt? Would know, how Harrington stands committed? Whether upon the first, second,
or third Commitment? In the first, the Lords of the
Council charge Crime—Aggravate that to misbehaviour, and that holds water, and they commit him to
the Tower. Suppose all the case be true of misdemeanor, he asks, Whether for misdemeanor a man
may be committed close prisoner? And whether they
are not to take bail, if it be tendered? He would have
them speak out, and then he will tell you more what
he has to say.
Serjeant Maynard.] Harrington may be brought to
the Bar, if he desires it. He may be indicted or bailed.
The Countess of Shrewsbury complained to the Council-table, that the Lady Arabella was treating with foreign Ministers. The Lady Arabella refused to answer.
By the advice of the Judges (at Common Law) she
was committed, and it was no new thing. E. 1. A
Clerk forged a Fine; the Lord Chancellor examined
him; he was convicted, but removed to the Exchequer, and there tryed, and was convicted. Some
matters of State must be looked after, in another manner than the common way—He cannot but justify the
Secretary's warrant-general, "for misbehaviour." But
that about "pressing the men in Scotland," he does
not. He would adjourn the Debate till to-morrow.
Lord Cavendish.] Moves for this other person, Harriot,
to be brought likewise.
Mr Secretary Williamson said.] On his honour and
sincerity, he knew not where he was, nor where to
Mr Harrington was ordered to be brought to the Bar to-morrow.
Sir Francis Winnington.] If persons had the spirit of
prophecy, this of his Commitment may be debated today; but cannot without his Commitment. Whenever
an offence is committed against the King, as Contempt, the person (though committed by the King)
may be delivered by Habeas Corpus, or Bail. He always will justify the legal Prerogative, but also the
liberty of the subject—Knows no fine laid for miscarriage, but for Contempt of the Council there is a
Statute. The Council may commit in many cases, but
in order to Tryal. No man can say they can judge or
fine a man. But where Treason is brewing, if a man
may not be committed by the Council, he fears the
Government will shake—But still in order to Tryal
—No Judgment but in order to Bail, or Habeas Corpus.
Sir William Coventry.] He would not have us run
into Harrington's crime, whilst we debate it, and make
the King stay for us, being this day ordered to attend
him at three o'clock.
[The House went up accordingly to attend his Majesty, &c.]